The NHS has published its new waiting times figures. My colleague James Ball will have all the details shortly.

This evening there is a "Save our NHS" rally at 6pm at Central Hall, Westminster, protesting against the government's health and social care bill.

The bill - which hands £60bn of NHS funds to GP-led local groups of doctors to spend on patients' treatments and opens the door to more private provision of NHS services - is currently at report stage in the House of Lords. Peers will continue debating it tomorrow.

Thousands of nurses, midwives, doctors, physiotherapists, cleaners, porters and other NHS workers are expected to attend tonight's rally. Speakers include comedian Jo Brand, who used to be a psychiatric nurse, as well as health workers including a speech therapist, a paramedic, and a psychiatric nurse, plus a pregnant mother, union leaders and politicians, including shadow health secretary Andy Burnham and former SDP leader Lord Owen.

Brendan Barber, the secretary general of the TUC, is expected to say:

Together we are speaking up for a publicly-accountable health service, for the values that make our NHS special and for the ethos of public service itself … I want the message to go out loud and clear that our NHS is not for sale, not today, not tomorrow, and not ever.

The government's bill represents the biggest threat our NHS has ever seen. It will mean £3bn spent on change instead of care, NHS patients pushed to the back of the queue by those with fatter chequebooks, and a postcode lottery of provision.

The bill will also mean privatisation on a huge scale, with our health service opened up to competition by any willing provider. Private firms will profit by cherry-picking the easiest, most lucrative work - leaving the taxpayer to pick up the tab for everything else ...

This is a bill that is wrong for patients, wrong for the public, and wrong for Britain. Virtually nobody wants these reforms, almost nobody supports them, and certainly nobody voted for them.

Dave Prentis, the general secretary of Unison, said:

The clock is ticking and we are running out of time to save the NHS. Health workers from across the country will make their opposition to the dangerous health and social care bill heard loud and clear today in London. They know that the bill will mean the end of the NHS as we know it and they want it to be dropped.

Introducing competition into the NHS will usher in private companies. They will put profit before patients. Where you have competition you have winners and losers and it will mean that patients are hit as some hospitals close. Taking the cap off the number of private patients that can be treated by a hospital means that those who can pay will go to the front of the queue. NHS patients will face growing waiting lists ... Voters will never forgive, or forget the party that ruins our NHS.

As the NHS bill apparently reaches its final parliamentary stages, the government seems to be of the view that once the royal assent is granted, the political and professional furore will die down and the small print of implementation can be safely consigned to guidance and secondary legislation. This suggests a degree of naivety that could be corrected by any student of policy implementation. What we are more likely to see is three types of ongoing resistance.

11.32am: Reporter David Hencke – formerly the Guardian's Whitehall correspondent – has been leaked a document that purports to show the various organisations that will make up NHS London under Andrew Lansley's reforms, and how they will work together, my colleague Claire Phipps reports. The diagram is here and Hencke's blog is here.

Hencke writes:

In my view this document gives a complete lie to the idea that some how we are going to have a wonderful bureaucrat-free NHS with thousands of new doctors and nurses … It more looks like a recipe for chaos, fragmentation, confused accountability and irresponsibility with taxpayer's cash. This diagram illustrates why it is costing £1.3bn to do this.

There has been much controversy over whether the reforms will, as Lansley argues, reduce the amount of bureaucracy within the health service. Baffling diagrams like this certainly don't seem to help his case. But perhaps our readers who work in the health service can tell us whether this does in fact represent a simplification of current structures?

11.44am: On Tuesday we asked readers' to tell us what they would like to see from our NHS coverage – in response to comments which made such suggestions. Community coordinator Hannah Waldram set up this poll for readers' to submit ideas and suggestions, as well as vote on each others' ideas. She writes:

We had an overwhelming call from readers on this blog and the politics live blog to investigate certain stories and provide different types of coverage which users felt was being looked over. While we already spend time listening to suggestions and ideas posted in comments – and encourage readers to shape our coverage of stories via the Newsdesk Live blog and open newslist – we set up this poll as an experiment for you to vote on each others' ideas – the most voted for will be taken into consideration by editors. The poll is still open to new ideas and votes here – so far top suggestions include looking into a piece on privatisation, investigating "vested interests" of Lords and MPs and highlighting the campaigns against the bill. Add yours and vote here or post your comments below the line.

Jo Brand at the Save our NHS rally tonight

11.53am: Evan Harris, the former Lib Dem MP who is a bit of a thorn in the coalition's side, has written about the NHS bill in today's Guardian.

Harris says the changes the House of Lords has made to the bill do not satisfy the concerns of the Lib Dem party.

The bill does now offer improved transparency of decision-making in commissioning, tackles conflicts of interest, and rules out price competition. But it does not deliver on local democratic accountability. And it fails to provide the required safeguards against existing NHS services being destabilised by competition.

The regulator, Monitor, is partly constrained from letting competition rip. But the bill is still framed so that a market-oriented regulator (which is what Monitor's personnel are bound to be) will be free to drive competition into the health service "in the patient's interest", as there is no reciprocal requirement to promote collaboration.

He calls for the bill to be ditched due to its having little support and no mandate.

The political impact will be to retoxify the Tory brand – which they are welcome to do, of course – but also, by association, to damage the Lib Dems … Unless there are more last-minute changes to deliver what the party required, at this weekend's party conference I urge Lib Dems to call for the plug to be pulled on this legislation – for the sake of the NHS.

11.57am: Len McCluskey of the Unite union, who will address tonight's protest rally, said today in an article on LabourList that the NHS was "on the point of privatisation", adding: "We are fighting for the very soul of our NHS against a government who arrogantly ignores the will of the people."

12.01pm: There was good news of sorts for the government in figures published today on waiting times for diagnostic tests, which people are expected to receive within six weeks at the latest, James Ball writes.

This January, 8,973 people waited more than six weeks for tests, out of a total waiting list of around 500,000.

This is around 21% fewer than the previous January, when 11,363 people waited six weeks or more.

However, the figures are still markedly worse than when the coalition came into power. In May 2010, fewer than half as many people waited over six weeks: 3,495.

Comparisons between May and January are somewhat unfair: January is typically the worst month of the year as the Christmas break delays some procedures. However, this year's figures are substantially up on January 2010, when 7,080 patients waited six weeks or more for a diagnostic test.

12.10pm: Tory MP Simon Hart rattles off damning statistics about the NHS in Wales, laying the blame at Labour's door. (The Labour-run Welsh assembly government is in charge of the NHS in Wales.)

David Cameron says that is "an example of what happens without the money, without the reforms".

12.30pm: In the comments, Gwledig has posted this link showing the MPs who voted against the motion from Andy Burnham to publish the NHS risk register.

12.59pm: The chairman of the British Medical Association's consultants' committee, Mark Porter, said today that consultants' time and effort is being diverted from improving patients' care by the need to fight the government, both over health reform and the future of their pensions.

Porter said the government was being "belligerent and obstinate" and consultants were being put under "extreme pressure" to reduce the time they spent on improving services because of financial constraints. He called the health and social care bill "447 pages of unintelligible red tape".

The Press Association also reports on the defeat of opposition amendments to the health bill in the Lords yesterday.

Amendments designed to restrict the role of regulator Monitor and protect the NHS from European competition law were voted down.

1.17pm: The Society of Radiographers says it is going to live-stream the rally tonight here.

1.38pm: Hello, this is Denis Campbell, the Guardian's health correspondent, taking over from Paul Owen. I'll be doing a stint here before heading off to tonight's big rally at 6pm at Central Hall, Westminster. Paul will be back then.

2.03pm: A new opinion poll out today underlines the bill's unpopularity and thus arguably the scale of the political risk the coalition is taking by pressing ahead with despite the widespread discontent. Mind you, David Cameron said just last week that it is risk he is prepared to take.

Pollsters NOP asked 1,000 people on 25 and 26 February this question:

The government's proposed health bill represents the largest reorganisation of the NHS since it began in 1948. At the last election the prime minister stated there would be no top down reorganisation of the NHS. In light of this promise do you think the government is right or wrong to introduce its health bill?

52% of respondents said it was wrong to do so, 29% said it was right and 18% did not know. The NHS Support Federation, the campaign group that commissioned the survey, says that it "shows that public trust in the coalition is being eroded by the huge controversy surrounding the NHS changes".

Paul Evans, the group's director, said: "The government is clearly losing the public's trust, by presenting huge NHS changes when it promised it wouldn't and by forcing them through in the face of overwhelming opposition."

This is the latest of several recent polls to confirm either that the bill itself is not popular and/or that it has eroded support for the Conservatives. But given the preamble to the question itself, and the persistent "noise" we have seen about the bill for close to 18 months now, it's perhaps surprising that the 52/29 margin was not even wider still.

2.46pm: One of the key claims against the health bill is that it's a broken promise: that is, that ministers are doing something they specifically said they wouldn't - having yet another reorganisation of the service, the umpteenth in its 63-year history.

The coalition agreement of May 2010 said: "We will stop the top-down reorganisation of the NHS," for example. Yet two months later brought Andrew Lansley's radical and evidently well thought-through white paper, which led to the bill itself six months after that, in January 2011.

Work done by the NHS Support Federation, who commissioned the new opinion poll I outlined in my last post, seems to bear out the charge that what the Conservatives in particular have done in office is very different to their pre-election promises.

The pro-NHS campaign group looked at what it calls "a random sample of coalition election materials" issued by candidates standing for both the Tories and their partners in power, the Liberal Democrats. The Federation says that it found that:

Out of 50 election leaflets delivered by the Conservatives, none mentioned NHS reorganisation. The most common claim, made in 30 leaflets, was to increase NHS spending in the next parliament. The next most popular statements about national health policy were promises to cut bureaucracy and to reduce targets, which each occurred 9 times.

It adds:

In a survey of 20 Liberal Democrat pamphlets the most common promise was to protect frontline services, which occurred 12 times. There was no mention of radical reform.

This was an admittedly unscientific exercise. But I suspect that opponents of sitting MPs who issued such leaflets will doubtless seek to profit from these pledges and statements at the next election.

3.01pm: A doctor at today's annual meeting of the British Medical Association's consultants committee has just messaged me to say that it will stage a motion of no confidence in health secretary Andrew Lansley at 3.45pm. We'll update you on that when we get the result.

3.41pm: The NHS reorganisation isn't the only thing on the minds of health service staff. Their pensions are too, given the government has fairly radical plans on that too. The GMB union has today voiced fresh fears about the long-term viability of the NHS Pension Scheme if the coalition's changes happen.

Rehana Azam, the GMB's national officer for the NHS, says their 35,000 members in the health service - which include paramedics, community and district nurses, plus caterers, porters and ancillary staff - are "outraged" that ministers have decided to press on with implementing what she calls "unaffordable in creases to contributions" despite the ongoing dialogue between unions and the government over pensions.

Contributions are going up by an average of 1.3% for everyone in the NHS who earns more than £26,500.

"These increases, coupled with the moves to force health workers to work longer, seriously threaten the ongoing viability of the pension scheme," said Azam.

3.43pm: The vote of no confidence in Andrew Lansley among the 200 or so attendees at the BMA consultants conference will now take place at 4.05, I understand; not 3.45 as I said earlier. Sorry for the confusion.

4.02pm: It's a shame, I think, that medical royal colleges forced to hold an extraordinary general meeting to debate their stance on the health bill feel the need to exclude the media. The Royal College of Physicians did so last week at its EGM, thus depriving journalists of direct access to one of the more important meetings the body representing hospital doctors has held in quite some time.

It's not just them though. The Royal College of Surgeons of England and Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, who hold their own EGMs tomorrow evening and Friday afternoon respectively, say that they won't be letting any reporters in either.

All colleges cite their rules, which state that no one apart from members and/or fellows can attend an EGM. I know nothing of their rulebooks, so must assume that that is indeed the case. But surely common sense should persuade royal college presidents that, given the bill's significance, barring matters of huge sensitivity being discussed, the rules should be relaxed and journalists allowed in?

Yes, the NHS reforms have produced a very fractious atmosphere in the medical community and led to lively debate – and disagreement – between members of different colleges about the bill. In that those members are no different to their fellow medics elsewhere and the wider world. And yes, some royal college presidents have had an uncomfortable time over the bill.

But on such important matters journalists should be enabled to report, in the way that many medical royal colleges are already usually media-friendly, and not hindered, as we will be tomorrow and Friday.

4.32pm: Breaking news ... The BMA consultants' conference has just passed a motion of no confidence in the health secretary, Andrew Lansley - against the advice of BMA leader Hamish Meldrum, according to doctors at the event.

4.48pm: Hi, Paul Owen back again as Denis heads off to the rally. He'll be speaking to some of the demonstrators and sending us some quotes.

Below the line commenters are discussing whether or not they can attend this evening's rally - and how voices will be heard from those who cannot attend. As we draw closer to the protest some commenters are expressing more reasons why they feel the NHS is a valuable service - similar to the stories on the #nhssavedmylife Twitter hashtag - we're also asking readers "what does the NHS mean to you?" for an interactive here.

What's painfully missing in all this is a sense of reality/connection on the ground; absence of voices from those staff directly involved with day to day care, and with decades of experience and expertise. Perhaps our only hope is the "grassroots" in political parties, public bodies, campaign groups and health staff themselves to speak out?

The NHS is owned by the people for the people and should be protected by the people. God only knows just how many precious lives have been saved throughout it's existence. I am 66 years of age and an old sit at home and I make no excuse for not attending the London rally. I am afraid this government will ignore the trade unions and other pressure groups and push ahead with it's reforms. I believe it will take very large peaceful demonstrations organised through social networking to get this awful piece of legislation scrapped.

4.58pm: Denis Campbell has just been in touch to say that the BMA press office has confirmed that its consultants' conference, attended by about 200 senior hospital doctors from a range of specialities, did indeed this afternoon endorse a motion stating "that this conference has no confidence in the secretary of state for health".

And it was passed against advice from Hamish Meldrum, the BMA's chairman of council - its leader - who is one of the speakers at tonight's Save our NHS rally.

6.05pm: Brendan Barber, the TUC's general secretary, is speaking now. He says it is vital to make their voices heard while the bill is still in the Lords. Our NHS must never be for sale, he says. The bill represents the biggest ever threat to the NHS, he says.

My elderly relatives have been telling our family that before 1948 when the NHS came into being they had to go cap in hand and beg for money from a wealthy man in the town so that they could pay for hospital treatment for their child because my uncle's national health insurance didn't cover his children. They felt humiliated by this. Now, post 1948 they are very, very proud of the NHS.

They oppose the health bill! So it's not just communists, trade unionists, vested interests etc who oppose the bill.

BTW: they have also just withdrawn their membership of the Conservative Party!

My GP and 4 of his colleagues at my Group practice which consists of 6 GP's, are furious that these reforms have not been brought in months ago.Only 1 GP thinks his responsibilites will be increased too much and detract from his contact with patients.

The patients I have spoken to on my regular visits are split about 50/50, and all of them 100% don't care who provides the service, as long as it remains free and is of at least the standard they currently receive.

My personal experience of NHS and private has been that I have allways received better treatment in the NHS than private, although I can understand reforming the NHS as the waste of resources I have seen on my many visits to hospital leaves a lot of room for improvement.

The NHS is my lifeline - literally. I have an incurable lifelong disability and would be uninsurable in a privatised-healthcare system. But I do want to not only stay alive but have some quality of life as well. Simple as that.

The NHS BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY AND NOT TO THE POLITICIANS AND THE PROFITEERS.

THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO MANDATE. At least not from us - only from McKinsey, behind our backs.

Dr John Lister of the Keep our NHS Public campaign speaks next. He talks about the private company Circle Healthcare, getting some pantomime-style boos from the crowd.

6.37pm: Up next is Jo Brand, the comedian who used to be a psychiatric nurse.

She says that having been a nurse and a comedian she knows that laughter is the best medicine - although that tends not to work in the case of impotence.

She is depressed about the NHS changes - the poorest and most vulnerable will have nowhere to go, she says.

She remembers the changes in the 1980s when cleaning services went out to tender.

One thing she loved about nursing was the humour of nurses. When she was in the middle of labour, having her first child, someone came in to ask for her autograph - "so I signed it on their arm with a scalpel".

The elderly will suffer under these changes, Brand says.

She doesn't like the government but she does have a soft spot for Nick Clegg - "it's face down in a bowl of custard".

6.45pm: Dr Kailash Chand, whose e-petition calling for the government to drop the bill was so popular, speaks next.

Chand says the bill is senseless and friendless. Your healthcare will depend where you live and how wealthy you are, he says.

At best Cameron is a PR man, he says, and at worst he's a conman. That gets a big cheer.

Labour have just sent through the speech Andy Burnham, the shadow health secretary, will make at the rally. Burnham will announce that Labour will hold a House of Commons debate and Drop the Bill vote next Tuesday.

This is the fight of our lives. We are facing a bill that breaks 63 years of NHS history. It legislates for a free market; no longer 'One NHS' but hospital pitted against hospital, doctor against doctor. It's an attack on the N in NHS bringing a postcode lottery, longer waiting lists, damaging the doctor-patient relationship. We are doing everything we can to stop it.

170,000 people have signed an e-petition and yet the government has denied them a debate on this health bill. This why tonight I am announcing that Labour will give them that voice with a House of Commons debate and Drop the Bill vote next Tuesday.

But it's not about party politics or point-scoring. The NHS is more important than that. We have built a new coalition of professionals, patients and people of all parties who feel the same as we do. The truth is that time is running out for the NHS. This bill could be passed in less than two weeks time. 2012; not remembered first and foremost as the year of the Olympics but the year they killed the NHS.

But if we pull together we can still change events. What is great about tonight is that it has brought together into one place all those folk that Nye Bevan spoke of with the faith to fight for the NHS. We must now meet that fight with energy, passion and determination. The government isn't listening. So from this rally tonight let's make our Drop the Bill call reverberate all the way to this weekend's Lib Dem spring conference in Gateshead and so loud it shakes the foundations of parliament and Downing Street. Nothing matters more to me than the NHS. And if we stand together and fight together, we can still win.

6.49pm: Len McCluskey from Unite speaks next. He says he hopes that people will get as angry about the changes to the NHS as they did about his comments floating the idea of striking during the Olympics.

He says he doesn't want his children and grandchildren saying to him: why did you do nothing when they were taking away our birthright? We will hound these MPs wherever they go, he says.

Clement Attlee and Aneurin Bevan introduced the NHS with a mandate from the British people - unlike Cameron and Clegg, he says.

It is a constitutional outrage the bill was presented in this way, he says.

He apologises for the House of Lords because it has not made any fundamental changes to the bill. The poison in the bill runs very deep - it is to commercialise and marketise healthcare.

It challenges the basic principles of the NHS, he says.

To a heckler, he responds crisply: "I've never been a Liberal."

He hopes the Lib Dem activists vote against the bill on Friday at their spring conference.

An NHS London blueprint leaked to David Hencke

7.25pm: Next is a video message from a pharmaceutical worker in the US. She says the privatised system in the US means profit is more important than medical care. Healthcare often becomes a privilege in America, she says. The United Steelworkers union stands with you, she tells the rally.

7.29pm: Prof John Ashton, county medical officer for Cumbria, who was disciplined for signing a letter criticising the bill, speaks next. He calls the government a "Dickensian mob that know the price of everything and the value of nothing". "It's not over yet," he says, calling for people to go to the Lib Dem conference on Friday as visitors and "save the NHS yet".

7.31pm: The crowd boos the words "Liberal Democrat MP" - but it's Andrew George, an opponent of the bill. He says the NHS needed stability to meet its £20bn efficiency target. He makes a couple of veiled criticisms of Labour - at the second one, someone starts heckling. He calls the bill a "top-down re-disorganisation". Responding to more hecklers, he says mildly that he has voted against the government at every turn.

There is no procedure left for the Commons or the Lords to vote the bill down, he says. The only way out would be for the government to withdraw the bill.

The crowd don't seem to want to hear this.

George says protesters have to offer the government a dignified exit strategy. "Shouting at us isn't going to achieve much."

7.49pm: Andy Burnham, the shadow health secretary, is the final speaker, introduced as "the man who is leading the official opposition's fight against this bill", which is literally true but perhaps makes him sound more of a national leader of this protest movement than he is. I posted the text of his speech earlier.

7.52pm: Burnham promises that if he becomes health secretary, he will repeal this bill.

7.53pm: Denis Campbell writes to say that even some of the speakers at the event accept – in private – that, barring an unlikely major revolt by Lib Dem members at their spring conference this weekend, the NHS plans will finally soon pass through the Lords, and then the Commons again, and then gain the royal assent that campaigners dread.

7.55pm: Frances O'Grady wraps up the rally by saying they only have a few weeks more to make their case to MPs and peers and "pursue Andrew Lansley ... everywhere he appears". She leads the crowd in a chant of: "Drop the bill, viva NHS."

• Protesters against the government's health and social care bill have gathered for a rally in Westminster to demonstrate against the bill, which hands £60bn of NHS funds to GP-led local groups of doctors to spend on patients' treatments and opens the door to more private provision of NHS services.

• Andy Burnham, the shadow health secretary, said Labour would hold a House of Commons debate and vote on dropping the bill next Tuesday. He said if he became health secretary he would repeal the bill. Lord Owen, the former SDP leader, said the bill was a "constitutional outrage" and said he hoped the Lib Dems would vote against it at their spring conference on Friday.

• Comedian and former psychiatric nurse Jo Brand brightened up the rally with some good jokes.She said that having been a nurse and a comedian she knew that laughter was the best medicine - although that tended not to work in the case of impotence.

My colleague Tom Clark says it is not hard to see why George thought that - the Lords almost never votes at third reading, so would not customarily have a chance to kick out a bill at this stage. But, says Tom:

The "normal" way for the Lords to kill a bill (with normal in quotes, seeing as even this is very rare) is through a wrecking amendment at an earlier stage which resolves that the bill should cease being considered. The House of Lords information office explains that amendments at third reading are not made by custom (and please don't get into what happens if you bust custom; absolutely no one knows), and so you could not kill a bill through a wrecking amendment at third reading

In that sense, you might might think, the peers have missed the boat. There is, however, one final opportunity after - or at least at - the moment of third reading. The Lords Speaker says "that this bill be read a third time" and a peer shouts out that "this bill do not pass" and then if they are seen to be speaking for more than themselves, the Speaker calls a division.

Not unconstitutional, but very, very rare - last happened in 1972. Don't ask me what the bill was ...